Just finished my first solo game of AA and am looking forward to break out this for my friends and let them experience a longer game with more layers than we usually have in our conflict games. Here is the thing though - We have a tendency to table talk about current game situations and form alliances to tackle a player in lead position, adding a lot of game time. This might be problematic...

How much table talk are you experiencing in this game with 3-4 players? Is there a lot going on diplomacy wise?

Just finished my first solo game of AA and am looking forward to break out this for my friends and let them experience a longer game with more layers than we usually have in our conflict games. Here is the thing though - We have a tendency to table talk about current game situations and form alliances to tackle a player in lead position, adding a lot of game time. This might be problematic...

How much table talk are you experiencing in this game with 3-4 players? Is there a lot going on diplomacy wise?

Lots. And it ends up not being a short game. Last time was about 8 hours, if I recall. 8 hours of very engaged intense players who would gladly do it again, but it's not a short game.

Just finished my first solo game of AA and am looking forward to break out this for my friends and let them experience a longer game with more layers than we usually have in our conflict games. Here is the thing though - We have a tendency to table talk about current game situations and form alliances to tackle a player in lead position, adding a lot of game time. This might be problematic...

How much table talk are you experiencing in this game with 3-4 players? Is there a lot going on diplomacy wise?

Hi, for our group of four-player sessions, not a lot of table talk (though there were some arguments) as everyone was on their own. However, we did experience longer than usual "analysis-paralysis" syndrome.

But it's true that it's a long game, if you read my session reports, but you can always opt to play it in the shorter version. Time flies when we play this game and we didn't realize how fast time has passed until 3-4 hours later, and the game ended at 6 hours plus, still only slightly more than half way to the end game.

Our gaming group has played both AA and ADP, and, as usual with our multi-player games, I find there's lots of talking with COIN games, often "in character", including bluster, "warnings", "threats", unsolicited commentary, and just general kibbitzing. Diplomacy in COIN has to be "open", so naturally everybody has something to say about any proposed "deals" (I wouldn't call them "alliances", except the Govt and Coalition on ADP, as they are quite transitory). And, true, the games aren't short, but they're fun!

Expect tons of table talk. I have a session report on here somewhere where I played the government and took kickbacks from every faction at some point in the game (the business of government is business . . . I mean corruption). You always want to see if you can find a greedy sponsor for your activities somewhere around the table.

Haven't played AA other than solitaire, but I would expect a lot of table talk to occur depending on who is at the table. Negotiating is part of the charm of this game, so you're likely to have some (or much) "wheeling and dealing," including potential reneging on deals made (the Rules are very clear that deals made aren't binding, although you're likely to have trouble making future deals if you've reneged on a past one). In fact, the Playbook for ADP has a charming illustration of a double-cross by the Taliban of a deal they make with Warlords.